I like the sense of peering through the undergrowth, a Gollum's eye view perhaps(!), but feel the sheer amount of foreground (could have been less by just peering over the top of the rock?), queers the perspective too much by making the climber seem disproportionately small. ~> This kind of kills the sense of perspective for me.
A higher F stop / lower shutter speed, would have improved the depth of field as well, to limit the amount of blurred foreground.

The climber obviously being the centre of theme; from a climbers point of view, I think would have seemed more impressive making the clip, instead of having a runner clipped above the move that is being made.

A tough market putting photos out for review...
I mainly like it because it is different, and I look forward (maybe), to stugang's critique!

Cheers for the comments guys, always good to have constructive opinions! I wanted to make South Central looks a bit better than a pile of dust! Hope it worked.
Regarding excess foreground, I was trying to not capture anyone working on Sunshine in the Frame! Also, I had a remote flash set up that didn't fire on a few shots for some reasons, didn't get the wow effect... Anyways, all good fun, I'll get back there to try to nail the shot eventually!

The problem with Froggy showing less rock at the bottom is that you would have then seen me working Sunshine - and trust me I'm not photogenic at all so the picture would have been destroyed! I reckon the mossy rock gives it a bit more of that natural space feel, I really like it as is.

Are we rating cool photos, or cool climbing photos?
This is the former... not so much the latter.
For a cool climbing pic - you need to see the climber - he's almost half in
shadow and blurry.
That said, the image is amazing, what an amazing collection of random
colours and natural brush strokes.

I disagree with martym's assessment of a good climbing photo. Simon Carter's world climbing coffee table books have lots of photos that make me want to go and climb at that location but the climber is only part of the overall picture. It is not just about the climber. This is why I like this shot because the perspective is different and unusual AND it would actually make me consider a return to south central (consider and then decide against it).

The green circular fringe with a brown central hue is reminiscent of my screen saver
photo.

PS. My screensaver is a 'from the inside looking out' shot from someone's bum
infested with rectal gonorrhoea having just dropped a log. Like I said captures sth
central perfectly.

PPS simey - I AM NOT DUANG DUANK. Like you i don't have time to post much
anymore either - in any case I am grateful that so many [abuse of another registered user moderated by Chockstone Moderator] think that he is me. Saves me from the bother of having to keep my irritation levels up.

>BigG wrote:
>I disagree with martym's assessment of a good climbing photo.

Well you see - I said it's a good photo. I think the area looks very serene
and all that.
If you saw a photo of a nice cliffline with no climbers at all - would you
define that as a "good climbing photo"?
I assume (perhaps wrongly) that what differentiates a climbing photo from a
landscape is that it captures climbing in action. This photo does, but (IMO)
not greatly.
The rest of the photo is beautiful - just not the blurry image of a climber
appearing from the shadows. That's all I'm saying.

Regarding the "blurriness" of the climber, I disagree, he is quite sharp (as sharp as you're gonna get with a wide angle Canon L lens anyway) check this link http://www.flickr.com/photos/nicklebaut/8910396478/sizes/k/

I don't like it.
It shows very little climbing action at a crap location.
If I could give a negative assessment star rating of it I would, but the worst the system allows me to give it is no stars, so you have done better from me than I would prefer.

Thanks Nick Da Frog - it's amazing how much shrinking a photo can affect
your impression of it. I'm
now looking at the full sized version on a big arse monitor, and it's
actually quite nice if you crop out the blurry rock in the foreground; the
climber is far sharper than in the "original" chockstone resized version.
Well done.
(I'd still crop out that boulder, it is the "eye-catching" point of the photo - and
that should be the climber)

@ Martym
Cheers for the feedback! I guess I wanted to achieve a "landscape shot" including some action in it. A bit like those shots where it takes a little while to register what's going on in the photo. Regarding the foreground, I wanted an even "breaking-the-rule-frame" around the climber.

To all, this is great. I can't believe that one of my photo is getting such a debate happening! Thanks again for the feedback wether you hate it or you love it!